Has that thread been edited? I ask because when I looked, the 1st response seemed to be a reply to an earlier response. I can make no sense of it.

Down at the bottom you should see a link "Previous Comments" which will take you to the first 800.

Thanks. I had no idea. I will look again tomorrow.

ASIDE: I remember Ichthyic"/"Sir Toe_Jam" from here and Panda's Thumb. He was one of the people who helped me go from Christian to Atheist. He is/was a working scientist.

Yeah. It made me a little sad to come down on him so hard. I actually like him (or did when we used to talk) and he actually was my first facebook friend. I don't use facebook though so that never really went anywhere. But I still want to dive the New Zealand underwater parks with him. He has a knack for seeing beauty underwater.

He might have taken it personally though and not like me anymore. :(

--------------Who said that ev'ry wish would be heard and answered
When wished on the morning star
Somebody thought of that, and someone believed it
Look what it's done so far

sigh...maybe for Christmas the holiday that happens in the month of December I'll finally get that edit button.

You lost that EDIT button for a reason. Do you really want to bring that up again?

Anyway "Merry Christmas", I like it also. See that? I like CHRISTMAS.

Look at what I said on a "damn Christmas" board.

Accomodationist!

--------------It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it. We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

Personally, I refuse to be part of any movement concerning the belief (or lack there of) of deities and supernatural forces on principle, but it seems highly oxymoronic to join a movement that has an implied mission of being against a specific movement. In the words of Val Kilmer's Doc Holiday, my hypocrisy goes only so far.

You are being dogmatic, Robin. Medical science has clearly proven that participating in a regular movement is part of a healthy lifestyle.

--------------we IDists rule in design for the flagellum and cilium largely because they do look designed. Bilbo

The only reason you reject Thor is because, like a cushion, you bear the imprint of the biggest arse that sat on you. Louis

To PZ because I'm not allowed to post what I see as dissent at your blog any more.

Quote

PZ Myers says:1 December 2011 at 1:52 pm

upbraiding those who have granted it as “accommodationists”

I have? I certainly have not. I have said I do not accept the apology — I haven’t told anyone else that they shouldn’t. If you’re content with a guy saying a few words at you, sure, go ahead, accept it.

Just don’t tell me I have to.

And with that, since this pavlovsdog troll has shown up and begun repeating the same arguments that have been dispensed with previously, and refuses to even consider anything anyone else has said, I think this thread has run its course. I’m closing it in about an hour, so go ahead, splutter out your last few comments, then bang, it gets shut down.

I still don’t accept the apology, and nothing anyone has said so far in this excessively long thread has persuaded me otherwise, so don’t bother thinking you’ll be able to get in the last zinger. You won’t.

The problem PZ, is that you dispensed with them by ignoring them. This was not discrimination against atheists as a class. If you would have had the humility to ask PD, he would have explained the relevant law to you since he is actually a defense attorney.

But actually, it shouldn't take an attorney to understand that whether or not the attendees were atheists, the sign did not discriminate against atheists as a class. The equivocation is false. The civil rights act protects people from being discriminated against based on their class, not their behavior.

Period. I think a half dozen people explained it but the cult mind protects its narrative too closely.

The skepticon attendees may self-identify with the class but they are a specific group, not the class. You are actually wrong about the legal question. And yet you claim it has been dispensed with. That is a dishonest tactic even if it was made out of stupidity.

You dismissed it, but that only reflects your lack of commitment to accuracy. In fact, the man did not in any way whatsoever discriminate against atheists as a class. Like I wrote, I would have been free to walk in and buy gelato and would not have felt persecuted in any way. That's because atheists as a class were not discriminated against.

No matter how desperately you want to spin the events to fit your narrative, the apology in fact addressed the correct topic. He has nothing else to apologize for in this circumstance. You don't need to like him. You don't need to accept his apology. But your grounds for not accepting his apology are actually discriminatory though not illegal because the civil right act does not mandate what you are allowed to believe or think, it mandates punishments for actions which can be proven to be discriminatory based on class. The issue of whether atheists are a protected class is not in dispute. The issue of whether he discriminated against a protected class is what is in dispute. He didn't. He discriminated against attendees of an event because the actions he observed at the event offended him.

Seriously, if you still don't understand this, call the aclu. Then, when you discover your error, I hope you will apologize for it. If you do, I will accept your apology.

--------------Who said that ev'ry wish would be heard and answered
When wished on the morning star
Somebody thought of that, and someone believed it
Look what it's done so far

(snip) Sometimes it's even deep regret I feel for what religious people may have done to them that caused them to reject God.(snip)

*sigh*.

No religious person did anything to me to cause me to reject God.

No Irish person did anything to me to cause me to reject leprechauns, either.

I knew there would be this objection. But, let me tell you, I've heard a LOT of atheists directly and vehemently blame religious people for their atheism.

There are many reasons for how we arrive at our overall worldview, and they are all different. But, don't disregard what I said just because you've never had any negative experiences with people of religion. It happens all the time. I've run across plenty of religious people myself who have made me rethink all my beliefs because of their hatefulness and/or hypocrisy.

I'm not disregarding what you said. I believe you've met said people. I simply wished to counter what I perceived as a gross generalization.

--------------"But it's disturbing to think someone actually thinks creationism -- having put it's hand on the hot stove every day for the last 400 years -- will get a different result tomorrow." -- midwifetoad

Well that was all very interesting and entertaining. BWE, fantastic work there trying to get them to see things clearly. It's interesting that in the face of being hammered by the fact that "Skepticon attendees" doesn't equal "atheist", they just didn't get it. Or want to get it. PZ even started trying to rewrite his OP. Victimhood means that much to them - it seems like a central component of the hive mind there. They absolutely have to have the cache of being an oppressed minority. I wonder what's the prime motivation for that? Justification to do what they really want - attack theists? The status of civil rights agitators? Guilt at their privileged western middle-class backgrounds?

Well that was all very interesting and entertaining. BWE, fantastic work there trying to get them to see things clearly. It's interesting that in the face of being hammered by the fact that "Skepticon attendees" doesn't equal "atheist", they just didn't get it. Or want to get it. PZ even started trying to rewrite his OP. Victimhood means that much to them - it seems like a central component of the hive mind there. They absolutely have to have the cache of being an oppressed minority. I wonder what's the prime motivation for that? Justification to do what they really want - attack theists? The status of civil rights agitators? Guilt at their privileged western middle-class backgrounds?

it's a sexual fetish, an evolutionary stable strategy for neckbeards with a zero life time fitness in any other environment

--------------You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

Well that was all very interesting and entertaining. BWE, fantastic work there trying to get them to see things clearly. It's interesting that in the face of being hammered by the fact that "Skepticon attendees" doesn't equal "atheist", they just didn't get it. Or want to get it. PZ even started trying to rewrite his OP. Victimhood means that much to them - it seems like a central component of the hive mind there. They absolutely have to have the cache of being an oppressed minority. I wonder what's the prime motivation for that? Justification to do what they really want - attack theists? The status of civil rights agitators? Guilt at their privileged western middle-class backgrounds?

it's a sexual fetish, an evolutionary stable strategy for neckbeards with a zero life time fitness in any other environment

That implies that Pharynguloids are going to speciate or go extinct. Homo pharyngulensis, what a thought.

Hm, perhaps that's what happened to H. neanderthalensis. Some group of H. heidelbergensis started to feel oppressed, and called themselves H. sapiens. From there it all went downhill.

--------------It is fun to dip into the various threads to watch cluelessness at work in the hands of the confident exponent. - Soapy Sam (so say we all)

TBH, from now on I will suspend any and all judgments untill I see PZ condemning the "Famille de France" association for having been trying to suppress the "Hellfest" metal festival for quite some years now.

I'm french, helping USAians the best I can to fight religious fuckups, but I've yet to see any of the opposite.

PZ, your move...

--------------"Hail is made out of water? Are you really that stupid?" Joe G

"I have a better suggestion, Kris. How about a game of hide and go fuck yourself instead." Louis

"The reason people use a crucifix against vampires is that vampires are allergic to bullshit" Richard Pryor

TBH, from now on I will suspend any and all judgments untill I see PZ condemning the "Famille de France" association for having been trying to suppress the "Hellfest" metal festival for quite some years now.

I'm french, helping USAians the best I can to fight religious fuckups, but I've yet to see any of the opposite.

PZ, your move...

Your male privilege has blinded you to the fact that metal music is misogynistic. After all, it wasn't "Womyn, Womyn, Womyn" that Mötley Crüe was singing.

--------------It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it. We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

TBH, from now on I will suspend any and all judgments untill I see PZ condemning the "Famille de France" association for having been trying to suppress the "Hellfest" metal festival for quite some years now.

I'm french, helping USAians the best I can to fight religious fuckups, but I've yet to see any of the opposite.

PZ, your move...

Your male privilege has blinded you to the fact that metal music is misogynistic. After all, it wasn't "Womyn, Womyn, Womyn" that Mötley Crüe was singing.

SO GOATS OR HORSES THEN?

Where teh fuck is this going?

If it's NZ then Sir Toe Jam/ Ichthys will be waiting with an Piscis Austrinus for your water troubles.

TBH, from now on I will suspend any and all judgments untill I see PZ condemning the "Famille de France" association for having been trying to suppress the "Hellfest" metal festival for quite some years now.

I'm french, helping USAians the best I can to fight religious fuckups, but I've yet to see any of the opposite.

PZ, your move...

Your male privilege has blinded you to the fact that metal music is misogynistic. After all, it wasn't "Womyn, Womyn, Womyn" that Mötley Crüe was singing.

The day Motley Crüe is metal is the day I die!

Glam rock, sure, hair rock, sure. Metal? No way!!!

--------------"Hail is made out of water? Are you really that stupid?" Joe G

"I have a better suggestion, Kris. How about a game of hide and go fuck yourself instead." Louis

"The reason people use a crucifix against vampires is that vampires are allergic to bullshit" Richard Pryor

Well that was all very interesting and entertaining. BWE, fantastic work there trying to get them to see things clearly. It's interesting that in the face of being hammered by the fact that "Skepticon attendees" doesn't equal "atheist", they just didn't get it. Or want to get it. PZ even started trying to rewrite his OP. Victimhood means that much to them - it seems like a central component of the hive mind there. They absolutely have to have the cache of being an oppressed minority. I wonder what's the prime motivation for that? Justification to do what they really want - attack theists? The status of civil rights agitators? Guilt at their privileged western middle-class backgrounds?

it's a sexual fetish, an evolutionary stable strategy for neckbeards with a zero life time fitness in any other environment

Well that was all very interesting and entertaining. BWE, fantastic work there trying to get them to see things clearly. It's interesting that in the face of being hammered by the fact that "Skepticon attendees" doesn't equal "atheist", they just didn't get it. Or want to get it. PZ even started trying to rewrite his OP. Victimhood means that much to them - it seems like a central component of the hive mind there. They absolutely have to have the cache of being an oppressed minority. I wonder what's the prime motivation for that? Justification to do what they really want - attack theists? The status of civil rights agitators? Guilt at their privileged western middle-class backgrounds?

My take on their fanaticized victimhood (I sooo like that term) is that some of them, like PZ, have really had a number of years of being hammered by the assumed Christian privilege and are just fed up now. Any hint of Christian imposition is now seen as an attack of privilege and it automatically triggers an over reaction. The rest of the echo chamber just feels the need to vent their wangst, whatever it may come from - social minority, sexual minority, economic minority, bad hair minority, emo minority - and the forum gives them the opportunity to play oppressor.

I think they all just need to hit a BDSM club and assume their appropriate roles.

And I second the cheer BWE. Nice job! Cheers to Lizzie too!

ETA: misspelling

--------------we IDists rule in design for the flagellum and cilium largely because they do look designed. Bilbo

The only reason you reject Thor is because, like a cushion, you bear the imprint of the biggest arse that sat on you. Louis

Well that was all very interesting and entertaining. BWE, fantastic work there trying to get them to see things clearly. It's interesting that in the face of being hammered by the fact that "Skepticon attendees" doesn't equal "atheist", they just didn't get it. Or want to get it. PZ even started trying to rewrite his OP. Victimhood means that much to them - it seems like a central component of the hive mind there. They absolutely have to have the cache of being an oppressed minority. I wonder what's the prime motivation for that? Justification to do what they really want - attack theists? The status of civil rights agitators? Guilt at their privileged western middle-class backgrounds?

it's a sexual fetish, an evolutionary stable strategy for neckbeards with a zero life time fitness in any other environment

--------------It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it. We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

(snip) Sometimes it's even deep regret I feel for what religious people may have done to them that caused them to reject God.(snip)

*sigh*.

No religious person did anything to me to cause me to reject God.

No Irish person did anything to me to cause me to reject leprechauns, either.

I knew there would be this objection. But, let me tell you, I've heard a LOT of atheists directly and vehemently blame religious people for their atheism.

There are many reasons for how we arrive at our overall worldview, and they are all different. But, don't disregard what I said just because you've never had any negative experiences with people of religion. It happens all the time. I've run across plenty of religious people myself who have made me rethink all my beliefs because of their hatefulness and/or hypocrisy.

I'm not disregarding what you said. I believe you've met said people. I simply wished to counter what I perceived as a gross generalization.

Well, I don't count those people as atheists, really. "Angry at God" people are not atheists, either. Knee-jerk anything is shallow. I try to live by rationality and that is my true guiding star. It's nobody's "fault."

I have encountered many more believers who hate religion for it being a grist mill of mediocrity, conformity, and hypocrisy - take a look at the "Jesus would never allow this" comments on any message board discussing that church in Kentucky that just banned interracial couples. At least that church is begin roundly condemned.

Many of those people who blame believers for their "atheism" will be right back at the altar, or will join another religion, in time. That's the stereotype of the atheist, isn't it, that "if you would just let yourself go," we would believe? That, deep down, "you do believe"? Well, I'm sorry, but that is not true of me, and if it's true of others then they are not "atheist" in the sense that I am.

ETA - There is no one to blame. I think that is what is so scary for people about atheism - no simple black and white. Blaming "believers" is just replacing God with people and giving people too much power. No one is omniscient in the true atheist universe. It is not a cosmos of simple cause and effect, but one in which a simple cause can have many complex effects, and one simple effect can have many causes. Experience is shades of gray. I don't really have beliefs, because what is there for me to really believe? I accept things (including evolution) as highly probable. I live by "If...then" statements.

Convert me? Can't be done.

Edited by Kristine on Dec. 02 2011,09:32

--------------Which came first: the shimmy, or the hip?

AtBC Poet Laureate

"I happen to think that this prerequisite criterion of empirical evidence is itself not empirical." - Clive

Given Kristine's comment above, it appears to me that the term atheist is used by a variety of people with a multitude of different perspectives about the world. I'm not sure I consider myself an atheist - more of a non-theist I think - but then I have found people I feel share a similar viewpoint use the term atheist for their perspective.

I've created a rough categorization of atheists' perspectives just to organize my own understanding on the subject.

1) Skeptic Atheists - these are folks who are simply find the idea of the supernatural questionable and hard to accept. They may or may not be reliant upon evidence or lack there of and may or may not have a scientific methodological mindset; the are just skeptical of fantastical claims in general.

2) Methodological Atheists - These are people who are skeptic atheists who scrutinize the concepts of theism and find (have found) them invalid and/or non-credible. Basically these are folks who scientifically check fantastical claims and find them lacking and thus conclude there is no point in accepting them.

3) Reactionary Atheists - these are the folks FtK is talking about and I've met a few. They are atheists because (or so they claim) of something about religion that rubbed them wrong. Maybe it was hypocrisy, maybe it was abuse, maybe it was just that the church they attended or religious authorities they met gave them bad vibes. The reason seems to be irrelevant. Basically the term atheist for them means anti-religious, but they throw the whole concept of god(s) out with it.

4) Pragmatic Atheists - these are folks who are atheists on principle because it seems like a practical way to live. They tend to be big picture folks and having looked at history and the impact of religion and the concept of god(s) on people and societies, have concluded that religion and gods are myth and that atheism is, in principle, a more practical and life-fulfilling perspective. See secular humanist.

5) Militant Atheists - See PZ Myers and similar folks. These are people who promote atheism and feel that theism is a threat to an atheistic way of life.

6) Born Atheists - These are people who were born and raised atheistic and continue on with the perspective. Some born atheists will move on to other types of atheism, but many just never really think about their atheism at all and just go through life without regard for theism or the concept there of at all.

7) Apathist Atheists - These are atheists who just don't care about the issue or their beliefs (or lack there of). It's not an issue for them at all; it doesn't define them and they generally have other things in life that they devote their attention to.

--------------we IDists rule in design for the flagellum and cilium largely because they do look designed. Bilbo

The only reason you reject Thor is because, like a cushion, you bear the imprint of the biggest arse that sat on you. Louis

1) Skeptic Atheists - these are folks who are simply find the idea of the supernatural questionable and hard to accept. They may or may not be reliant upon evidence or lack there of and may or may not have a scientific methodological mindset; the are just skeptical of fantastical claims in general.

Isn't this really just agnostics? It does seem to apply to me. As I have said, this whole thing is only a small part of who I am and doesn't command a lot of my bandwidth. But, I do identify as an agnostic and reject the label athiest.

--------------It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it. We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

Given Kristine's comment above, it appears to me that the term atheist is used by a variety of people with a multitude of different perspectives about the world. I'm not sure I consider myself an atheist - more of a non-theist I think - but then I have found people I feel share a similar viewpoint use the term atheist for their perspective.

I've created a rough categorization of atheists' perspectives just to organize my own understanding on the subject.

1) Skeptic Atheists - these are folks who are simply find the idea of the supernatural questionable and hard to accept. They may or may not be reliant upon evidence or lack there of and may or may not have a scientific methodological mindset; the are just skeptical of fantastical claims in general.

2) Methodological Atheists - These are people who are skeptic atheists who scrutinize the concepts of theism and find (have found) them invalid and/or non-credible. Basically these are folks who scientifically check fantastical claims and find them lacking and thus conclude there is no point in accepting them.

3) Reactionary Atheists - these are the folks FtK is talking about and I've met a few. They are atheists because (or so they claim) of something about religion that rubbed them wrong. Maybe it was hypocrisy, maybe it was abuse, maybe it was just that the church they attended or religious authorities they met gave them bad vibes. The reason seems to be irrelevant. Basically the term atheist for them means anti-religious, but they throw the whole concept of god(s) out with it.

4) Pragmatic Atheists - these are folks who are atheists on principle because it seems like a practical way to live. They tend to be big picture folks and having looked at history and the impact of religion and the concept of god(s) on people and societies, have concluded that religion and gods are myth and that atheism is, in principle, a more practical and life-fulfilling perspective. See secular humanist.

5) Militant Atheists - See PZ Myers and similar folks. These are people who promote atheism and feel that theism is a threat to an atheistic way of life.

6) Born Atheists - These are people who were born and raised atheistic and continue on with the perspective. Some born atheists will move on to other types of atheism, but many just never really think about their atheism at all and just go through life without regard for theism or the concept there of at all.

7) Apathist Atheists - These are atheists who just don't care about the issue or their beliefs (or lack there of). It's not an issue for them at all; it doesn't define them and they generally have other things in life that they devote their attention to.

all of these may be subsumed under "neckbeard"

--------------You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

1) Skeptic Atheists - these are folks who are simply find the idea of the supernatural questionable and hard to accept. They may or may not be reliant upon evidence or lack there of and may or may not have a scientific methodological mindset; the are just skeptical of fantastical claims in general.

Isn't this really just agnostics? It does seem to apply to me. As I have said, this whole thing is only a small part of who I am and doesn't command a lot of my bandwidth. But, I do identify as an agnostic and reject the label athiest.

Yeah...this pretty much is an agnostic. Still, I hear people who have this perspective define themselves as atheists. Who am I to question their co-option of the term?

--------------we IDists rule in design for the flagellum and cilium largely because they do look designed. Bilbo

The only reason you reject Thor is because, like a cushion, you bear the imprint of the biggest arse that sat on you. Louis

--------------"But it's disturbing to think someone actually thinks creationism -- having put it's hand on the hot stove every day for the last 400 years -- will get a different result tomorrow." -- midwifetoad

(snip) Sometimes it's even deep regret I feel for what religious people may have done to them that caused them to reject God.(snip)

*sigh*.

No religious person did anything to me to cause me to reject God.

No Irish person did anything to me to cause me to reject leprechauns, either.

I knew there would be this objection. But, let me tell you, I've heard a LOT of atheists directly and vehemently blame religious people for their atheism.

There are many reasons for how we arrive at our overall worldview, and they are all different. But, don't disregard what I said just because you've never had any negative experiences with people of religion. It happens all the time. I've run across plenty of religious people myself who have made me rethink all my beliefs because of their hatefulness and/or hypocrisy.

I'm not disregarding what you said. I believe you've met said people. I simply wished to counter what I perceived as a gross generalization.

Well, I don't count those people as atheists, really. "Angry at God" people are not atheists, either. Knee-jerk anything is shallow. I try to live by rationality and that is my true guiding star. It's nobody's "fault."... Snipped to save space.

Good points. I believe that I may have stated that my journey from Christianity to atheism was "caused" by religious people. It wasn't though, it was just that their dishonest behaviour is what prompted me to examine my beliefs.

I'm not sure where I fall on that list. I could, at any one time, be any one of those. I would say "born atheist" except that I was not raised as one - certainly not!

The problem is, that list still assumes religion, then defines why someone rejects it. To me, religion has always seemed as artificial as a corset. I'm not Sadie Thompson in Rain; I'm the unnamed Pago Pago girl who does not even care for her animistic island religion, but dances when the drum starts. I'm an animal without a pack leader.

How about hedonistic atheist? Or natural atheist? Someone for finds meaning in doing, rather than in thinking (even rational thinking)?

Flower of the Orient atheist? Shut up and dance atheist? Pagan atheist? Lapsed pantheist? How about just a straight up heathen! Horrors!

I used to pretend to be animals when I was a kid. I suppose that is really what I would like to be - a wild cat.

--------------Which came first: the shimmy, or the hip?

AtBC Poet Laureate

"I happen to think that this prerequisite criterion of empirical evidence is itself not empirical." - Clive

I'm not sure where I fall on that list. I could, at any one time, be any one of those. I would say "born atheist" except that I was not raised as one - certainly not!

The problem is, that list still assumes religion, then defines why someone rejects it. To me, religion has always seemed as artificial as a corset. I'm not Sadie Thompson in Rain; I'm the unnamed Pago Pago girl who does not even care for her animistic island religion, but dances when the drum starts. I'm an animal without a pack leader.

How about hedonistic atheist? Or natural atheist? Someone for finds meaning in doing, rather than in thinking (even rational thinking)?

Flower of the Orient atheist? Shut up and dance atheist? Pagan atheist? Lapsed pantheist? :p How about just a straight up heathen! Horrors!

I used to pretend to be animals when I was a kid. I suppose that is really what I would like to be - a wild cat. :)

A good point Kristine. I intended Apathist Atheist to be what you are describing, but it doesn't quite meet that.

I started to put Natural Atheist, but thought (and still think) that doesn't quite hit what you're getting at.

Of course, the problem with defining atheism is that it tends to contrast with theism. But you're right - most atheists I know do not describe their perspective as based on an assumption of religion that is rejected. I'll have to work on my definitions a bit.

ETA: In truth, perhaps you aren't an atheist. Atheism (to me) at it's core can be either a lack of belief in God or gods or a belief there is no God or gods. Perhaps we need another term for the first definition since that meaning tends to be considered only after explanation (and rejected outright by a number of atheists and theists) in most situations. But really, atheism should be assumed to mean "without theism" unless specified otherwise.

I propose the term omniatheist - someone who is totally without any theism.

ETA 2:

Scratch that...there's already a perfectly good term. I believe you are a plain old apathist - some without a regard for the beliefs in, or lack there of, anything theistic. Basically an apathist is someone who just doesn't care to consider theism at all.

Sounds good to me.

--------------we IDists rule in design for the flagellum and cilium largely because they do look designed. Bilbo

The only reason you reject Thor is because, like a cushion, you bear the imprint of the biggest arse that sat on you. Louis